Revisited: 5 Predictions for the Future of the X-Men Franchise

Note: This list was originally formed back in May of 2014, around the time that X-Men: Days of Future Past hit theaters. With the latest X-Men film, Apocalypse, arriving just a few days ago, I thought I would take a look at the list and see what I got right. Enjoy!

If you can say anything about X-Men: Days of Future Past, it’s this — once the film was done, it blew the lid right open on what could happen in the future of this franchise. To say why would be a spoiler and, well we will certainly get into that territory in a bit, it’s interesting to note just how wide the possibilities are for the future of the X-Men franchise. So I, always curious and always making poor predictions about things, decided it would be interesting to write up a little list of what could happen in the future of the X-Men franchise. There’s certain clues and expectations we have for the next few installments of the series but, once again, anything could happen really. But here’s my best guesses at what WILL happen. Check them out after the break.

And from this point forward, FULL SPOILERS FOR ALL THE X-MEN FILMS GOING UP TO DAYS OF FUTURE PAST. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED. With that out of the way, let’s begin with my first prediction.

Results: Correct!

Wolverine did indeed appear in the film, albeit briefly. Also, there was no payoff whatsoever to Mystique impersonating Stryker at the end of the last one, so…yeah, not the best plot point.

This I feel is a given, just based on the way the last one ended, with a focus on Mystique imitating Stryker and taking away the unconscious Wolverine. I mean, if this wasn’t going to be immediately dealt with in the next X-Men film, why even end the film in such a cryptic way? And though Hugh Jackman returning for another X-Men film aside from The Wolverine 3 has always been debated, it seems like Days of Future Past has reinvigorated his interest in the series, and that he’s upon for a few more times with the claws. And considering writer Simon Kinberg’s recent statement about original cast members making an appearance in X-Men: Apocalypse, it seems likely that the one original character who COULD be in Apocalypse without much hassle WILL be in Apocalypse.

2) The next film after X-Men Apocalypse will be X-Men 4, and continue the Apocalypse storyline

Results: Undetermined, but unlikely.

We don’t know what’s to come exactly after X-Men: Apocalypse, although with both Wolverine and Apocalypse out of the picture, it seems unlikely this will happen. But hey, Wolverine 3 will apparently take place in the Apocalypse, so…I’m not ruling it out yet, damn it!

Okay yeah, this one might just be fanboy pipe dreams, but it would be a damn shame if Fox didn’t capitalize on the potential here. As indicated above, Kinberg has been suggesting the original cast still has a place in the future of this franchise and, after the ending of DOFP, I would love nothing more than one final grand adventure with Jean, Scott, Wolverine, and Storm back on screen together. And the set-up here is pretty simple — X-Men: Apocalypse will set up the character of Apocalypse in the 80’s, and the will presumably end with the First Class team defeating him. But Apocalypse, being a god-like and immortal being of massive power, would return in modern day, in which the current X-Men characters would have to finish him off for good. BOOM. Make it happen, Fox. Oh, and bring back Nightcrawler. That dude was great.

Results: Kind of, but not really, but maybe??

It’s hard to say right now. On the one hand, Apocalypse definitely showed that Wolverine’s origins are completely different now, and will have nothing in common with Origins. However, will The Wolverine 2 and or Wolverine 3 or whatever it is feel committed to telling his origin again, or just rolling with things to get to the Old Man Logan tale? The latter is likely, but once again, we’ll find out!

I mean, they already did it with DOFP and X-Men: The Last Stand, right? And at this point it’s very apparent that Bryan Singer and Fox want to erase the memory of X-Men Origins: Wolverine from everyone’s mind, and what better way to do that than with a new origin story for Wolverine? Well it would keep all the stuff in his life before the 1970’s the same, everything after (mostly involving his induction into the Weapon X project) will be entirely different. No Ma and Pa Kent, no weird Deadpool, no Taylor Kitsch Gambit. They would be open to do the Weapon X storyline the RIGHT way, and to properly bridge Wolverine’s storyline with all the other X-Men films. And since it would take place in the late 70’s/early 80’s, it could also allow some of the First Class characters to cameo, or even have a major role in the film. An 80’s set team-up movie between Mystique and Wolverine? I would buy that for a dollar.

4) The Wolverine 2 will be a “Mid-Quel” between The Wolverine and Days of Future Past

Results: Nope!

Once again, The Wolverine 2/3/Whatever will apparently be an adaptation of Old Man Logan. It’s not out of the realm of possibility to have flashbacks that take place between The Wolverine and Days of Future Past, but it’s likely this will be a different apocalypse entirely.

But if that is not the case, then there’s only one other possibility for The Wolverine 2 in my mind — it would be a sequel to The Wolverine, but a prequel to Days of Future Past. There’s a 10 year gap ripe for exploration between those two films and, if they chose to go in this route, they could use the film to answer some of the burning questions left at the end of the last Wolverine film, such as how he go his admantium claws back or what exactly happened to his Japanese partner Yukio. Then again, this might not come to fruition, for I believe one thing to be true.

5) We will never find out about half the continuity errors in these films

Results: Yeah, pretty much

Continuity is the devil’s play thing.

There’s just too many plot holes and weird continuity errors in this series for any future sequels to answer. Even stuff like how Xavier came back to life at the end of X-Men: The Last Stand or the aforementioned admantium claw thing may not be answered, since the timeline in which those continuity issues existed pretty much doesn’t exist anymore. Did ANY of The Wolverine happen in this new timeline? Did the Styker storyline in X2 happen, or did Mystique’s muddling up of the Weapon X program prevent that film from occurring. None of it makes too much when you try to break it down (and trust me, I’ve spent literal hours trying to do so), so I wouldn’t be surprised if Singer, Kinberg, and Fox don’t even attempt too.

Either way though, by the end of Days of Future Past, this series pretty much reinvented itself, and could do anything it fucking wants in future installments. But what do you think will come from the next couple X-Men films. Or, more importantly, what do you WANT to come? Let us know in the comments.

Matthew Legarreta is the Editor and Owner of Freshly Popped Culture. A big ol' ball of movie, TV, and video game loving flesh, Matthew has been writing about pop culture for nearly a decade. Matthew also loves writing about himself in the third person, because it makes him feel important (or something.)

The Captain Marvel Teaser Trailer Is Here, And…It’s The First Trailer for A New Marvel Movie, All Right

The release of the Captain Marvel teaser trailer has been pretty hotly anticipated, arguably more so than many of the other Marvel movie trailers that have come before it. The primary reason for the excitement is of course due to the conclusion of Avengers: Infinity War, which I’m going to spoil because come on now, you’re reading this article, I know where your interests lie. Suffice to say, the downer ending of Inifinty War, in which seemingly all of Marvel’s newest characters up and fade away into nothing, has fans buzzing to see what is coming next. And with the trailer for Avengers 4: Titles Are Dumb still many months away, Captain Marvel represents our best shot yet at seeing just what Marvel intends to do with this universe going forward, and how the titular character will ultimately factor into it.

But even removing the snap from the equation, there’s plenty of reason to be eager about Captain Marvel on its own merits. This has been one of those MCU movies that was seemingly announced forever ago, and to paraphrase Marvel’s other big female superhero with her name in the title, it’s about damn time we actually get to see Marvel Studio’s first female-fronted superhero project. It might come as a shock to no one that the trailer shows the answer to that being, well…a Marvel superhero movie. Whether or not that excites you largely depends on your attachment to the brand overall.

Myself? I’m already in the bag for this cinematic universe so, really, this trailer could have been two minutes of Kevin Feige jet-skiing on his bag of money while smoking a very well put together Dollar Bill Blunt™, and I still would have had the movie on my list of most anticipated films of 2019. And with the MCU on a hot streak of, like, ten good-to-great movies in row, I would feel no regrets at all about doing so. As I have written many times in the past, Marvel Studios has earned my trust, in pretty much everything they do.

But to dive into the nitty-gritty of the trailer itself? It’s perfectly fine. It follows the modern blockbuster teaser trailer to a T, with the loud symphonic music playing over a bunch of vague money shots of CGI and action moments, paired with an equally vague but well-delivered monologue about, well, anything really. The fact that said monologue is coming out of the mouth of Samuel L. Jackson’s Nick Fury (as they so often do in the MCU) is extra points, though. Paired on top of that is the fact that said Nick Fury is looking all young and two-eyed, with disturbingly little uncanny effect to speak of in digitally recreating a mid-90’s Samuel L. Jackson. Which I’m aware is ironic, considering that the Uncanny Effect in and of itself speaks to the idea of something being so photo-realistic that the human mind, in turn, perceives it as unnatural. This is so photo-realistic and natural in the moment that, only upon true reflection, do I get really creeped out. Call it the Uncanny Uncanny Valley Effect Effect.

Like he looks real but he shouldn’t look real, you know? Crazy.

Oh right, the Captain Marvel trailer! So yeah, it’s one of those things where the most noteworthy aspect of the trailer lies in how unnoteworthy it is. Really it’s hard for me to gauge what exactly this movie will be, with the two-minute teaser doing little to fill in the tone or mood of the piece outside of “new superhero movie.” There’s some weird stuff going on timeline wise which, in the movie, might be really cool and unique. In the trailer, however, it’s kind of so jumbled up in editing that I’m not entirely sure what’s going down (so Carol Danvers has amnesia, or…?) Even more disappointing is the lack of a real “trailer moment,” something big and memorable ala Thor’s reaction to Hulk’s arrival in the Thor: Ragnarok tease, or Black Panther’s car flip, or even the lie that was the Avengers running together in the Infinity War trailer. The closest this trailer comes to a noteworthy shot is Carol Danvers sucker punching an old lady which, really, is only memorable for the “WTFness?” alone. I did like the brief image of Captain Marvel running up the side of the train, though, and some of the rotation shots at least point to an interesting style that directors Ryan Fleck and Anna Boden could be employing. That’s really the only hint of a unique approach or style in this trailer, though.

Lack of style isn’t exaclty bad, really, but not exactly fodder for overwhelming excitement either. Compared to something like Guardians of the Galaxy’s first trailer (where the “Hooked on a Feeling” scored edit made clear just exactly what kind of film we were dealing with) or Avengers: Age of Ultron’s first trailer (which wowed through pure mood and imagery alone), Captain Marvel falls short. Not bad, just short.

But, seriously, how amazing is it that this scene made it into the trailer? As a Marvel person I get the old lady is probably a Skrull or whatever, but to general audiences, this just represents their newest superhero punching a nice old lady FOR NO GODDAMN REASON. Glorious.

All that being said, it’s not like being merely “good” puts Captain Marvel significantly behind the first looks of other MCU films. In fact, I would say the majority of first trailers for Marvel Studios films have only been good, with only a few really strong ones being truly excellent in my mind. And with all but a handful of those films being great at the end of the day, I have no doubt Captain Marvel has the goods to keep Marvel’s winning streak going. We’ll find out when the film hits theaters March 8, 2019.

James Gunn Fired From Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Over Offensive Tweets…And Fuck If I Know How To Feel About It

Ever since Weinstein (or longer, really, with the Film Twitter outing of people like Devin Faraci and Harry Knowles feeling like the true kick-off in my mind,) I’ve become accustomed to seeing people I admire be suddenly and without much warning outed as bad people, and dropped like a hot potato from Hollywood at large. For a while there, it almost became something of a daily ritual: wake up, take a shit, find out someone I love is shit, put out a shitty response on a shitty certain network (you know the one), and continue with my day. It might hurt for a while, but ultimately I’ve viewed this entire #MeToo thing as a necessary pain for both the industry and our culture: bad people being outed and shamed for doing bad things, from Louis C.K. to Roseanne, was a necessary step in the betterment of our society. Even if things debatably went “too far,” (which I would argue was rarer than the alternative), I was pretty resolute in my opinion that everything going on was “right.”

I still feel this way, in regards to #MeToo. But today’s piece of Hollywood shaming is not about #MeToo, at least not directly. This isn’t an example of a person mentally or physically abusing someone, and getting away with it for years. Nor is it an example of a person saying something offensive or reprehensible, and facing swift punishment for it. No, James Gunn getting fired from Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 comes in the form of tweets….really bad tweets…from over a decade ago.

The background, just in case you need it: James Gunn has been the writer/director of the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise thus far, a task he has handled with aplomb. They are critical hits, audience hits, and box office hits. And perhaps more than any other current MCU series (give or take a Thor: Ragnarok), Gunn’s unique voice is clear throughout both films, in the musical choices (all his) to the jokes and gags (mostly his.) He puts one hell of a unique stamp on the MCU, and even if the Guardians movies aren’t my absolute favorite of the franchise overall (hint: you can see where they both rank here), they are dependably great in large part because of him. So regardless of the reasons for his firing, this would be a damn shame, and a massive blow to the future of the MCU post Avengers 4.

But the circumstances of his firing turn things into, frankly, a clusterfuck of political and ethical and moral quandaries that I’m far figuring out my exact position on. I will make one thing completely clear though: the tweets in question that lead to Gunn’s firing are UNACCEPTABLE. They are in incredibly poor taste, stink of someone trying way too hard to be “edgy” (one of my least favorite character traits in a person, really), and are not even the slightest bit funny. Even just putting the morality of the tweets aside, everything about the ethosbehind the tweets represents someone I would never want to encounter, nor want to support. Not just because the subject matter is bad, but because the sentiment behind it (SHOCKING and IN YOUR FACE and NOT AFRAID TO GO THERE humor) is so unbearable.

All that being said…this is a lot more complicated than simply being about bad tweets. The timetable for one is important, as pretty much all the tweets are from nearly a decade ago, and Gunn hasn’t exhibited the same penchant for that type of “humor” in the years since joining Disney and Marvel. Gunn also seems to be expressing remorse about the jokes, lauching a Twitter thread owning the horrid nature of the jokes, while still trying to explain how he has moved forward as a person and changed in the years since making them:

2. It’s not to say I’m better, but I am very, very different than I was a few years ago; today I try to root my work in love and connection and less in anger. My days saying something just because it’s shocking and trying to get a reaction are over.

5. Anyway, that’s the completely honest truth: I used to make a lot of offensive jokes. I don’t anymore. I don’t blame my past self for this, but I like myself more and feel like a more full human being and creator today. Love you to you all.

My words of nearly a decade ago were, at the time, totally failed and unfortunate efforts to be provocative. I have regretted them for many years since — not just because they were stupid, not at all funny, wildly insensitive, and certainly not provocative like I had hoped, but also because they don’t reflect the person I am today or have been for some time.”

“Regardless of how much time has passed, I understand and accept the business decisions taken today. Even these many years later, I take full responsibility for the way I conducted myself then. All I can do now, beyond offering my sincere and heartfelt regret, is to be the best human being I can be: accepting, understanding, committed to equality, and far more thoughtful about my public statements and my obligations to our public discourse. To everyone inside my industry and beyond, I again offer my deepest apologies. Love to all.”

So yeah: the tweets were bad then, are bad now, and everybody involved is aware of this. But is Gunn’s stupid jokes from a decade ago enough to take everything away from him? Furthermore, the tweets were a matter of pubic record for years: did Disney really not search Gunn’s history to see examples of his past public behavior? Did Gunn really not consider, in his years of reflection, that these tweets were terrible and should be purged before they got him in trouble? Apparently not, although I’m sure both parties will consider that a high priority moving forward. We’ve seen people get in trouble for bad tweets, even ones that were many years old (I remember Trevor Noah’s sexist “controversy,” do you?), but this is the first time I can remember that a studio actually had to respond to it in such a strong manner. Like with Roseanne before him, Disney has shown they are willing to cut ties with people they deem to be even a little bit controversial…for better or worse, really.

Of course, I can’t ignore the political angle of this, which adds just another shit nugget to the entirety of the proceedings. The main reason these tweets came to light in the first place was due to a concentrated effort of right-wing trolls (led by human diarrhea bag Mike Cernovich) to basically knock Gunn down a peg, and show that the outspoken director was guilty of his own bad behavior in the past. I want to make it clear: nothing that Cernovich or his ilk do, in my mind, is “right.” But the unfortunate, ugly truth of the matter is that this outcry had the desired effect — Gunn lost his job, and has been Publically Shamed on the Internet™. This counts as a gross win for them, but should we just pretend this is better than it is, because it benefits a bunch of people who are awful?

While there’s certainly a part of me that wants to rally against the forces that conspired to take down Gunn, it’s a lot harder to do that when actually looking at some of the tweets that he made. Would it not be hypocritical of me to cheer on the collapse of Roseanne Barr, while at the same time trying to defend Gunn and his actions? One of my least favorite things in the whole goddamn world is hypocrisy, and there’s plenty of that all-over today. Case in point: the alt-right cheering on the public shaming of an “enemy” over the “jokes” he made, when the same fuckers probably would be bemoaning about policial correctness and “social justice warriors” if it was someone they viewed to be on their side. Equally as hypocritical is some of the response I’ve seen from more left-leaning people: now they are the ones using the tactics of “it was a long time ago!” and “they were just jokes!” and a myriad of other ways of rationalizing Gunn’s behavior. That shit hasn’t excused past people celebrities who were Publically Shamed on the Internet™, and I don’t think it’s right to give Gunn the benefit of the doubt just because we like him.

On the same token…they were tweets. From a decade ago. And I’m not comfortably completely crucifying the man over them. But if it was someone I disliked…would I be? Would we all be? This matter is complicated as hell, and I’m not sure who is right or wrong here, or even if there is a true right or wrong. This kind of situation requires more nuance than I, or probably anyone sounding off on Twitter and the rest of the internet, can probably muster. All I know is that Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 is going to suffer big time for this, and that Marvel is going to have to work hard on restoring the damage to the brand. I return to the business and fanboy matters because, honestly, that’s all I can rationalize without feeling like I am wrong in some way. Because when it comes to the mortality and ethics of what happened here today, I’ll reiterate:

10 Other Members of The Americans Cast Who Should Be Put In A Star War (And The Roles That They Could Play)

The talk of the fanboy town this weekend was Keri Russell, a frequent J.J. Abrams cohort, joining the cast of Star Wars: Episode IX (or whatever it might end up being titled.) The think pieces came fast and furious from nearly the moment the casting was first announced, which shouldn’t be too much of a surprise: when any new detail drops about one of these Star Wars films, people will inevitably spend way too much time theorizing about what is to come, for better or (mostly) worse. But when it comes to my initial reaction to the casting, I only had two thoughts: 1) oh my god what is J.J. Abrams going to do to Keri Russell’s hair this time and 2) it’s so damn great to see The Americans cast get work.

Coming off of five years of being perhaps the best dramatic ensemble on television, I truly would be happy to see all of the cast members of The Americans land roles in huge films following the conclusion of the show. And not just huge films, mind you — I’m talking Star Wars huge films. Truly The Americans cast is versatile enough to land any role they could want in the galaxy far, far away, and with Russell’s casting, all I could think about (aside from how amazing she’s going to end up being in the movie, of course) was what her fellow cast members could also bring to the extended franchise.

And I’m a silly person who happens to have a blog so, sorry, you have to be present for my ramblings on such niche, unasked subjects! So here are 10 other members of The Americans cast who deserve a shot at a Star Wars gig and, for the hell of it, the character archetypes they would be great for in the universe. Thank me later, Kathleen Kennedy!

Holly Taylor (Paige Jennings):

Rey’s previously unmentioned bestie/roommate back home on Jakku. They stay up all night chowing down on dehydrated bread and talking about desert problems, as you do.

Noah Emmerich (Stan Beeman):

Maybe it’s recency bias, but I can’t help but imagine Emmerich playing a tough bounty hunter character. That being said, it will be pretty tragic when he realizes his co-pilot and best friend was his target the whole time. What a dramatic scene they will end up having in the Star Wars equivalent of a parking garage, though.

Brandon J. Dirden (Dennis Aderholt):

Brandon J. Dirden holds himself up with such calm and levelheaded prestige as an actor…making him a perfect choice to play a hapless senator trying to do the right thing, but missing the fact that OOPS an electric wizard is in control now. Bummer!

Costa Ronin (Oleg Burov):

I can definitely see Costa Ronin playing the cool, confident gangster type. He’ll also have a robot arm, for some reason. And he should keep his Season 6 beard, because DAMN does he rock the hell out of it.

Alison Wright (Martha):

Padme in a set of prequel remakes. Because if anyone could sell the anguish of being betrayed by someone they deeply loved for years, only for them to end up being a completely different person than who they thought they were, it would be her. Poor Martha…

Margo Martindale (Claudia):

It’s Character Actress Margot Martindale! Let her be whatever she wants! A Jedi master, a Sith Lord, a crime boss, a droid, a wookie, a gungan — she can do it all, dang it!

Frank Langella (Gabriel):

Let him be the kindest Jedi master ever. OR the most evil Sith Lord to ever exist. Frank Langella is somehow capable of channeling both.